cry havoc

Yes, I'm amused by the reports of those generous souls who took it upon themselves to suffer through the movie release for that sparkly-vampire story. All quite amusing. What is far from amusing is this tendency on the part of several reviewers to identify the sparkly-emo-vampire as gay.

Gay is not synonymous with 'stupid' or with 'lame'. This character is emo, stalkerish, and cardboard, but not homosexual. Anyone with two verbs and a noun to string together could at least put out the effort to find a more appropriate -- let alone colorful -- adjective to throw in the pot.

First off, the character is obsessed with a chick, so even if he shows latent homosexual tendencies (beats me, haven't read the book nor will I ever, ever see the movie), he's still obsessed-with-chick. It's probably a reasonable conclusion to say that he's at least predominantly heterosexual.

But more importantly, gay means the noun described likes the same gender. It does not mean the noun is strange, lame, freakish, twisted, stupid, or dresses up in bad 80s new-wave and smears its lipstick. Or even that it sparkles.

I have real trouble giving anyone the benefit of the doubt who complains about a story's typecasting women, and in the process of doing so, typecasts some other minority instead. Doesn't make it right, and it sure doesn't make it funny, and it sure as hell doesn't impress me.

Word choice, people. Learn it, live it, and get on with it.

This is a semi-continuation of my earlier post, which was far more reasonable and explanatory. I think. I'm not making that attempt in this post, but I divided the two to give myself length if I wanted it, and to allow those of you who want the quasi-intellectual contemplations without wading through the snark. Or vice versa.

As we return to the days of lore the scene of the crime, at last check the hero that bastard was on page twenty-nine of a thirty-three page chapter and starting to make decent headway, when what did arrive in the email inbox but...

I'll break it out in segments, because I feel the urge. Everyone, feel free to sing along when I get to the chorus. You should know the words by now, snark included free of charge, be sure to tip your waiters.

( Wait, can you call it a cease-and-desist notice if it's one thief accusing another thief of thieving? )

Geez. Some people.

If the character described is female, and she's given measurements of 38-30-36, a height of 5'4", and a weight of 100lbs, the author must be male, or a particularly lame-brained female who hasn't weighed 100lbs since she was in grade school. Anyone with C-cup boobs on a 38" ribcage knows that alone is going to be putting a fair 10lbs more on the scale's measurement.

130lbs does not automatically equal 'fat woman'.

For that matter, 170lbs does not automatically equal 'fat woman'.

( A post in which your host must now, as befits a former athlete, get a bit frothed at the mouth about lame-brained obviously-non-athletic authorial weight descriptions with no basis in reality. )

Or, better yet, all you authors who insist on giving "guess his/her weight at" measurements -- just stop! Just don't do it. You're perpetrating the stupidity myths in this culture about weight and strength, you're mangling reality in ways that just don't freaking work, and most importantly, you're annoying the fuck out of me.

Stop it. Just stick to "about so-tall," and physical description in terms of muscle, fat, curves, and planes. Leave the numbers game to those who have a clue, and let it slide for everyone else.

ETA: WE HAVE THE SOLUTION. -- a great resource. use it!

Sometimes the world of translations and scanlations really irritates me.

Let’s say I like a particular mangaka. Just like I do with English-language fiction (as do many people), when I find an author whose style and voice I like, I often go in search of other works by that person. It’s no different with standalone comic books (I clarify that as being in contrast to long-running serials like Superman or The Dark Knight, where the publishing house may contract a variety of authors and/or artists over a series’ long life). Over at Baka-Updates Manga, I learn the mangaka has a series with the Japanese title of Mainichi Seiten (picking a title completely off the top of my head). It’s been licensed. Okay, that means I can purchase it at my local comic book store, and I would expect it to be a decent-quality translation. (Not always, but one can hope. I mean, not all publishing houses are Dark Horse, after all.) The link, however, is to Digital Mania Publishing (DMP) who really, really need someone to kick them in the head. I mean really kick them in the head. Several times, at that.

The pages opens, and you see a series of cover-shot images, with the english titles above each image. I only know the Japanese title. I’m supposed to scroll through the images and pick something that looks like it might’ve been drawn by the specific mangaka I like? ( Where’s the search function? Oh, wait, there isn’t one. Where’s the author’s name listed? Nowhere. )

This is assuming I even have any interest in reading the mangaka’s work in the first place, if I’ve been able to find the remotest teaser or taste of his/her work to make me curious enough to search it down. ( Because for the scanlations prior to licensing, sometimes there are just so many goddamn hoops I have to ask: WHO OWNS THIS ANYWAY. )

It gets really ridiculous when you see non-translated scans, though. That’s where I just shake my head and wonder at this bizarre confluence of the internet’s strong “information wants to be free!” drive, ( meeting head-on with the human impulse to ‘own’ your work even when your actual input of ‘work’ is so derivative as to be nonexistent. )

Dear scanners: somewhere on this planet, in a small dark room, there’s a little boy playing a violin just for you.

I don’t care, though. I just wish DMP and its ilk would identify the authors, create a search function, and post at least the first four or five pages of any work so I can get a sense of the work. Then I could just avoid these self-entitled scanlation hostage-holders altogether.

(If I'm critiquing a neighbor, does that count as a review?)

Yo, neighbor, you suck.

Last night I drove past your house after sunset. Apparently you seem to think you're quite patriotic, but tonight I shall probably be arrested for spray-painting across your house, lawn, and truck that you're not patriotic but an OVERCOMPENSATING IGNORAMUS.

( I could pretty much guarantee that you've never been in the armed forces, sir. )

Dear Hollywood Producer:

I grew up reading The Dark is Rising series, and had minor hopes you wouldn't pull a Jackson halfway through the book (in re Faramir), but I certainly never expected this. I must say, do you intend to preface the movie with a thirty-second clip consisting of an apology to fans over the past forty years, and perhaps a warning that if one liked the book, one may -- if not most likely -- detest the movie, and for this fact you are most sincerely apologetic?

It's possible, of course, that you didn't actually read the book. I'm willing to give that creedence, given you seem to have missed some incredibly important details. Like, say, the fact that Will Staunton is -- I'm not making this up, but am in full seriousness here -- BRITISH.

Yes. What a shocker. British. Who would've thought it?

Although, I'm willing to consider that at some point, someone did point this out. I can only guess that you must have argued that for a movie to be popular in America, it must have an American face, an American accent, an American perspective. You have no idea how mistaken you are, and I can prove that point in two three words.

Harry. Frickin'. Potter.

( Or maybe you only read the synopsis, and this explains why the only similarity I can find between movie and book are in sharing a title. )

Okay, maybe you shouldn't bother with a thirty-second recorded clip extending your deepest apologies to any long-term fans. You're right, it's probably too late for that. I suggest you contact the FBI instead, and see how much it'll cost you to get into their protection program.

You're going to need it.

Nolove,
me.



PS: from the cast listing on IMDB:

Jim Piddock ... George
Mark Donovan ... Fight Promoter
Stephen Evans ... Trickster

Where's Dawson? Or John Wayland Smith? Who the hell are these characters, and what are they doing in one of my favorite storylines? Maybe someone else can explain this. I'll be back to find out if so, but in the meantime, I must go find my happy place.

Which today happens to be: in the LIBRARY, with a GLASS OF WINE, reading the REAL THING.

*gnashes teeth*

Rather than get into this on anyone else's journal -- especially anyone patently against my position -- I'll say it here. I made no attempts to be civil, because I'm pissed. Do not think for even a heartbeat that this means I feel no remorse for the dead: I am not heartless, I am furious. I am angry that those children were fish in a barrel, and thus, with all due caveats of this being my opinion...

The argument that outlawing guns will prevent murder is absolutely moronic.

I got a newsflash for you. Murder is illegal regardless of means, and it don't make even a speck of difference how it's done. I can kill you with a knife, and if we're in a district that's outlawed any knife whose blade is over 11", then I put away my chef's knife and I could murder you with a paring knife, if I get you in the right spot. I could slide a screwdriver between your ribs in just the right angle and skewer your heart. I could beat you over the head with a broken chair leg. I could drown you, I could suffocate you, I could throw you out a window. Or, I could go cheaper by the dozen, and still not need a gun.

Timothy McVeigh didn't use a gun. He used fertilizer.

It's still murder.

In fact, it's a fuckload easier for me to get ahold of a paring knife, a screwdriver, or even fertilizer, than it is to get a gun. And I don't just mean the background check or the three-day waiting period, I mean also that guns are damn well expensive. But I don't see anyone outlawing fertilizer, or paring knives, or screwdrivers, or even windows more than ten feet off the ground that don't have bars to prevent a body being thrown through them. No, I don't think that's a ridiculous response. Frankly, I think it's a good analogy because it reveals just how ridiculous it is to say that outlawing guns will cut down on murders. Bullshit. You know the old adage about the better mousetrap? It works for human vice, too: it doesn't matter what you allow or outlaw.

People determined to kill, will find a way.

Okay, so you take away our right to private gun ownership. Do you realize what this means? How much empirical evidence do you need? Look at Chicago, New York City, Washington DC: they have the highest murder rates of any cities in this country... and, curiously, they're also the cities in which private gun ownership is outlawed. The second amendment does not exist in those precincts; private citizens have no means nor right to defend themselves and their homes. And of course the criminals still have guns: if they gave a shit about the law, they wouldn't fucking be criminals.

( Face it. People will commit murder. One way or another. Nothing you can do will change this. )

Don't you feel safe now?

Gee. I sure do.

I shall rant. Go me.

I could say this elsewhere but for the sake of at least attempting to avoid too-extreme offense, I'll post it here, blather off, and carry on (which I'd do anyway, but you know the drill). Now, in case any of da flist missed the random political commentary now and then, yes, American. Despite the tattoo, I was never raised, nor ever expected, any kind of royal or noble position, nor is it ever gonna happen. Because, y'know, generic American mutt. Please keep this in mind.

Talking about fantasy, taking one place as jumping-off point but not all of this is single-source. It's just on my mind in a variety of ways because that's the way my brain works.

( Predestination, predisposition, and the issues of magic as religion or as technology. )

Dear Marketing Person:

I was going to spend $10 on a book, until I read the teaser you wrote, which begins, and I quote:

Imagine the glory of Rome. Now imagine it’s fall.

If you cannot see why I threw the book back on the shelf with a cry of disgust, you should not only be fired, you should be shot, as well.

No love,
me.

---

Mesdames Edghill and Lackey:

Please be aware that we have an annual quota on all characters used in typesetting, including punctuation, capitalization, bolding, and italics. Consider this notification that the first half of your two-novella book, Bedlams Bard, has not only maxed us out on italics, it has maxed us out for the next three years, and that was only in the first five chapters.

Please, couldn’t you have thought of the newbie authors and their chance to italicize at least four words per novel? The children? The kittens? The burning, weeping eyes of your readers attempting to parse pages upon pages where there’s more italics than not?

Have pity, please, both upon your readers and our goddamn quota, because if Poul Anderson can’t even italicize a single quasi-alien term in his next bestseller because we’re maxed to the gills, it is ALL YOUR FAULT.

No love,
the editors

I'm more than a little frustrated with what I see as some pretty ass-backwards, bogged-down, body-obsessed bullshit about virginity. Look at how we talk about it, like it's a tangible thing: I want to lose my virginity or I'm going to give so-and-so my virginity. It's embedded in the language but it makes you sound like you missed the clue-bus, because virginity is not something you can wrap up in a box and give someone. Nor is it a favorite hat that you wear until you come to some arbitrary decision that you've grown out of it and it's time to graduate to a new hat. Puhleese.

Granted, part of what stymies a conversation like this is the awareness that you must actually have had sex to comprehend what I mean. Otherwise your input, bluntly, is about as valuable/valid as me trying to hold forth on the values of natural childbirth. Having never been through labor, nor having ever attempted to pass a bowling ball, nor having ever taken my lower lip and pulled it up over my head, I can't speak with any knowledge on natural childbirth other than to quote people who have, and to state my one-step-removed opinion about those other people's experiences. Clearly if the only people I know to quote are people who found natural childbirth utterly excruciating, then this will color my one-step-removed opinion.

( But back to virginity. )